Date:         Tue, 22 May 2007 15:48:38 -0700
Reply-To:     Pensioner <al_knoll@PACBELL.NET>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Pensioner <al_knoll@PACBELL.NET>
Subject:      Re: 102mph - Turbo vs. 6-cylinder
In-Reply-To:  <200705222124.l4MLOvuM016883@flpi138.sbcis.sbc.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

It's not peak torque we brick drivers are seeking, it's a broad range of
usable torque.

If you look at the torque vs rpm curves for most turbocharged 1.8/2.5 litre
motors you will notice the peakiness of the curve.  If you look at the SVX
torque curve it shows >180lbs-ft from 1500RPM to above 6000RPM with a peak
around 235/240lbs-ft at around 4400RPM.  Smooth and flattish.  Just what you
need for a 5000lb truck.

Now if we had a constant 200lbs-ft from 1000 to 15000 rpm we could do with a
two speed transmission.  (ref Jim Hall, Chaparral MK2).

The only valid reason to have multiple speed transmissions is to allow one
to remain within the usable torque range of the powerplant.  Or since the
Corvette NEEDS a six speed to enhance one's virility and reduce one's guilt,
a second reason arises, desire or because you WANT one.  And now that you
HAVE one at exhorbitant financial and energy cost, you're mad as hell
because you're stuck in 20mph traffic with your
50000USD/600BHP/160MPH/13MPG@3.75 per gallon enhanced virility blingy
thingy.

If you want to ride the bullet train, you gotta buy the ticket.

De gustibus non disputandum est.

p